Olney: Top 10 bullpens in the majors (Orioles #4)

[ofahn]

Ahhh, remember those heady days of 2010 when there was widespread agreement that Jim Johnson, dominant as he was as a set-up man, just didn't have the intestinal fortitude to make it as a closer?

I will admit I didn't think he had it in him. I guess it just goes to show that you don't have to have prior closer success to be a successful closer.

[A_K]

It shows to me that "pitching" is an identifiable skill, but "closing" isn't.

No one could make the majors without the ability to perform in a high pressure moment. Talent evaluation system is far too rigorous. Anyone who buckled in that area wouldn't make it out of high school ball.

[Seafordeagles]

and one poster thinks Jim Johnson is easily replaced........................

[ofahn]

and one poster thinks Jim Johnson is easily replaced........................

Which, of course, he is IF you have the right kind of talent in your system to make such a replacement.

I'm sure there are others, but the last successful ML closer I can remember that we drafted as a closer was Gregg Olson in 1988. Normally, a closer was brought through a farm system as SP. When it becomes obvious that his skill set is insufficient to be a successful ML SP the team will pair down his pitches to his two best and make him a reliever.

The real test for a closer is not whether he can withstand a high pressure situation, but whether he can forget the previous night's failure. Jim Johnson LEARNED how to do that. IMO Strop, Hunter, Arrieta, Matusz, and O'Day have the stuff to be a closer, and Hunter, Strop, and Matusz have shown me the makeup to forget past failure.

Yes, Jim Johnson can be replaced. Will he be missed? Sure, you don't give up talent without some downside to it, but RP is an area of strength for us and if Johnson will get us an important piece or two for the future I would make that trade.

[Seafordeagles]

Uhh, this is the post about Jim Johnson I was referring to and you didn't write it:

"Johnson is easily replaceable. Hardy can be replaced if we receive a third basemen, which would be Peralta. We don't have a future at third base and Porcello fits our 5th starter spot with potential. I think I'd be fine with Johnson and Hardy for Peralta, Porcello, and Castellanos."

[A_K]

Easily replaced might not be the best way to say it. It's entirely possible that we'd struggle to plug in someone to a 9th inning role who would be as successful as Johnson. Luckily the risk of that happening isn't all that severe, since closers aren't all that valuable in the first place.

We'd be left trying to replace 70-80 innings of a relief pitcher expected to allow between 3 and 3.5 runs per nine innings. That's valuable, but not irreplaceable.

[Seafordeagles]

Easily replaced might not be the best way to say it. It's entirely possible that we'd struggle to plug in someone to a 9th inning role who would be as successful as Johnson. Luckily the risk of that happening isn't all that severe, since closers aren't all that valuable in the first place.

We'd be left trying to replace 70-80 innings of a relief pitcher expected to allow between 3 and 3.5 runs per nine innings. That's valuable, but not irreplaceable.

Great post, thanks for the input.

[osforlife]

Uhh, this is the post about Jim Johnson I was referring to and you didn't write it:

"Johnson is easily replaceable. Hardy can be replaced if we receive a third basemen, which would be Peralta. We don't have a future at third base and Porcello fits our 5th starter spot with potential. I think I'd be fine with Johnson and Hardy for Peralta, Porcello, and Castellanos."

I wrote that and I'd make that trade again in a heartbeat. Jim Johnson is a very good reliever but:
1. he racked up a bunch of saves because our team put him in the situation to do so(so many one run games)
2. we will likely see a drop in production(converting saves and pitching stats)
3. Darren O'Day was a better reliever in almost every category last year(ERA, FIP, xFIP, SIERA, WHIP, H/9, K/9, BB/9, avg against)
4. Jim Johnson's value is high right now, no?
5. Jim Johnson and Darren O'Day both had a WAR of 1.4 last year. Relief pitchers aren't as valuable as many think and I believe a team will overpay to get an effective late inning reliever.

Jim Johnson and JJ Hardy are quality players, nobody is doubting that. I'm also sure no fan of the Orioles would want to see them go, as they were big parts of the magical run of 2012. But the job of the Front Office is to do what is best for the team, not what is best for their personal affections for certain players. I would gladly take the best third base prospect in baseball and a young pitcher who I'd take over Zach Britton, Jake Arrieta, Tommy Hunter, Brian Matusz, and Steve Johnson, when what we'd be giving up would be positions that we have players to fill their spots, and potentially perform better.

[ofahn]

I wrote that and I'd make that trade again in a heartbeat. Jim Johnson is a very good reliever but:
1. he racked up a bunch of saves because our team put him in the situation to do so(so many one run games)
2. we will likely see a drop in production(converting saves and pitching stats)
3. Darren O'Day was a better reliever in almost every category last year(ERA, FIP, xFIP, SIERA, WHIP, H/9, K/9, BB/9, avg against)
4. Jim Johnson's value is high right now, no?
5. Jim Johnson and Darren O'Day both had a WAR of 1.4 last year. Relief pitchers aren't as valuable as many think and I believe a team will overpay to get an effective late inning reliever.

Jim Johnson and JJ Hardy are quality players, nobody is doubting that. I'm also sure no fan of the Orioles would want to see them go, as they were big parts of the magical run of 2012. But the job of the Front Office is to do what is best for the team, not what is best for their personal affections for certain players. I would gladly take the best third base prospect in baseball and a young pitcher who I'd take over Zach Britton, Jake Arrieta, Tommy Hunter, Brian Matusz, and Steve Johnson.

POINTS!

[thezeroes]

Since 1997 the following pitchers/closers have had saves of 40 or more and a WHIP of 1.400 or better.
Antonio Alfonseca 1.514 WHIP 45 SAVES 4.24 ERA 2000 YEAR FLA TEAM
Brian Wilson 1.444 WHIP 41 SAVES 4.62 ERA 2008 YEAR SFG TEAM
Todd Jones 1.438 WHIP 42 SAVES 3.52 ERA 2000 YEAR DET TEAM
Francisco Cordero 1.431 WHIP 40 SAVES 3.84 ERA 2010 YEAR CIN TEAM
Joe Borowski 1.431 WHIP 45 SAVES 5.07 ERA 2007 YEAR CLE TEAM
Jose Mesa 1.413 WHIP 43 SAVES 3.25 ERA 2004 YEAR PIT TEAM
Brian Fuentes 1.400 WHIP 48 SAVES 3.93 ERA 2009 YEAR LAA TEAM

Statistically they would seem to be untouchable closers if you look at just the save total but the WHIP tells a different story. Some had better years after this and some basically became journeyman relievers. Closers are overrated and if you can get a club to overvalue the overrated player the possibility of turning a future liability into several assets in a trade should be the goal of management. Think of Kevin Gregg in reverse. Instead of signing them long term flip them for pieces parts. IMO

[Seafordeagles]

I'm thinking of Mariano Rivera when you say closers are overrated.

And if closers are so overrated how come teams want them? Why would Jim Johnson be beneficial to the Tigers when he is overrated for the Orioles?

[thezeroes]

Antonio Alfonseca pitched for 7 more years in the majors and totaled 55 saves over 376 games and was paid over $14 million in that time period. He maintained his 1.515 WHIP over that time frame. He had 138 save opportunities an failed 27 times with 54 holds.
Miami had signed him to a multi year deal in 2001 and traded him to the Cubs in March of 2002 along with his contract of two more years. Florida leveraged him into Jose Cueto, Ryan Jorgensen, Julian Tavarez and Dontrelle Willis. Willis gave the Marlins a 68 W - 54 Loss record over 5 years with an ERA of 3.78 and a WHIP of 1.359. Willis has went full circle and is back with the Cubs this year.

Relievers after a couple of stellar campaigns and under a year or two of arbitration are usually sell high candidates.

[ofahn]

I'm thinking of Mariano Rivera when you say closers are overrated.

Rivera is a once in a generation player. Are you comparing Jim Johnson with him?

I might note that Rivera was also a converted SP.

And if closers are so overrated how come teams want them? Why would Jim Johnson be beneficial to the Tigers when he is overrated for the Orioles?

Teams do all kinds of foolish things. You know, like signing Albert Pujols to a stupid amount of money. The Tigers have made a HUGE investment in this season and they know they can't afford to leave any weak link (position) on their roster. They'll end up overpaying for a closer because they can't afford to take a chance on an untested rookie. They KNOW they need a proven commodity and they've had talks with other teams dangling Porcello for a SS. If they can't find of those then they'll almost certainly focus on a proven closer.

I would prefer to take advantage of their situation and trade both Hardy and Johnson for Porcello and Castellanos (along with Peralta as a throw in) to give us a chance to have a winning team for years. IMO Hardy would be the bigger loss than Johnson this year, but we could overcome that and would certainly benefit GREATLY from the trade in 2014.

[Seafordeagles]

Please show me ANYWHERE where I compared Rivera to Johnson.

[A_K]

The relevant point is that it's perfectly rational to acknowledge that closers, as a group, are generally overrated, even while the greatest closer to ever live (Rivera), has incredibly high value.